ISSN (Print) - 0012-9976 | ISSN (Online) - 2349-8846
-A A +A

THE PRESS- Bitter Disappointment

August 30, 1960 per cent of the non-poor localities, Four- fifths of MNP/ARP points were public, one-fifth private points, a larger share of private points went to the non-poof. After the findings on distribution of water points by type, locality, etc, the study tries to discover why 52 villages reported that, the poor "did not get the beneBt of drinking water public points under MNP and ARP In 32 of these 52 villages the reason was that the water point was at a distance and/or there was an alternative source at hand. Nineteen villages reported the reason as being frequent breakdowns of water supply and another 19 also said it was because of inadequate duration of supply. Eight villages reported that the poor didn't use water points because they were "meant for higher caste groups' Interviews with 1,174 poor households (about 10 per cent of the poor population) also explain what the difficulties are. 576 of them said that water was available from MNP/ARP wells and 397 said it was available from pipes. Half of them also said water was available in open dug-wells (which are usually not safe) and a quarter reported 'individual collection', ie, from (unprotected) canals, tanks, ponds, etc About half of all households said that there was inadequate supply throughout the year and this complaint applied equally to all modes of supply

Subscribers please login to access full text of the article.

New 3 Month Subscription
to Digital Archives at

826for India

$50for overseas users

Get instant access to the complete EPW archives

Subscribe now

Comments

(-) Hide

EPW looks forward to your comments. Please note that comments are moderated as per our comments policy. They may take some time to appear. A comment, if suitable, may be selected for publication in the Letters pages of EPW.

Back to Top